Footnote 312: The volume in the King's Library is made up of a great variety of documents independent of that history and of each other.[(back)]
Footnote 313: The Sloane MS. is assigned in the Catalogue to Higden. By Sir H. Ellis, it is attributed, though not correctly, to a Chaplain of Henry V; a small portion only having been the work of that eye-witness of the field of Agincourt. By Mr. Sharon Turner, it is attributed, without a shadow of reason, to Walsingham. Mr. Turner, however, has, though in a very inadequate manner, attempted in one part of his new edition to rectify the error, leaving it altogether unacknowledged where the correction is most needed, in the passage where he grounds upon its testimony his severe charge against Henry's character. See Turner, third ed. vol. ii. p. 373 and p. 398.[(back)]
Footnote 314: In p. 48, b, the writer speaks of "Sir John Oldcastle, Lord Cobham," being sent as a military commander to aid the Duke of Burgundy. In p. 50 the same person is spoken of as Johannes de Veteri Castro. In the former parts the word used for the enemy is "æmuli;" the Chaplain employs "adversarii."[(back)]
Footnote 315: Latitavit et latitat.[(back)]
Footnote 316: From this point the manuscript proceeds, in the very words of Elmham, to describe Henry's second expedition.[(back)]
Footnote 317: In the MS. the word is "lacum," probably a mistake for "laqueum."[(back)]
Footnote 318: The Author on the whole is rather disposed to think that, whilst the Monk records accurately what fell within his own knowledge, both he and the author of the Sloane MS. in this part borrowed from some common document, probably more than one; for in some points they vary from each other in a way best reconciled by that supposition. Thus, whilst the Sloane MS. tells us that Richard II. on his landing came to a place called Cardech, from which he started for Conway, the Monk (not differing from him in other points) says that he came to the castle of Hertlowli. They both have fallen into the error of making the Earl of Salisbury accompany Richard, whereas he had undoubtedly been sent on before from Dublin to Conway. They are both equally wrong about the relative positions of Flint and Conway, and make the parties all cross and recross the bridge at the castle of Conway, where a noble suspension bridge is now thrown over the arm of the sea. After the period, however, at which the Monk's narrative closes, the writer of the manuscript seems to be seldom free from error.[(back)]
Footnote 319: The Monk of Evesham makes no mention of Bolinbroke's proceedings before he landed in England.[(back)]
Footnote 320: This account of Hotspur's mission to Wales is the first circumstance mentioned by the manuscript after the chronicle of the Monk of Evesham ends.[(back)]
Footnote 321: The Sloane MS. says that it was on the 28th day of February; the King's MS. assigns it to the 18th.[(back)]